Deranged Nasat,
I asked Sci who was responsible for world war 2.
And he responded - these guys were, but they did that because of that other thing, they were practically slaves of circumstances!
Sci takes too much responsibility from those criminals because of some unconvincing premises, ignoring that they made their choices every step of their way, that they could at any time take another road.

Sci isn't ignoring their choices. He/she never said it wasn't about choice. But people make choices because of their experiences, and the details of their specific situation and circumstances. I don't think it's an "unconvincing" view that the economic deprivations in Germany, leading on from the reparations they were made to pay following WWI, contributed indirectly and in part to WWII; I was under the assumption this is pretty much accepted fact. This isn't saying "It was all really the Allies' fault", it's simply saying the actions of many nations contributed to what occurred. As you say, it's about choice: we all make choices- and everyone's choice effects everyone elses'. We are one: politics, like anything involving multiple people, is far too complex to let us hold each individual in a vacuum. This isn't to say everyone bears equal responsibility, but awareness of the effect we all have on one another helps prevent further conflict. My nation acknowledging its role in contributing to the situation in Germany prior to WWII allows us British to remember an important lesson: Treating a fallen foe poorly simply leads to them arising again with renewed hostility.

__________________
We are all the sum of our tears. Too little and the ground is not fertile, and nothing can grow there. Too much, and the best of us is washed away.